Minutes: 2003.10.21

[emtc@nc.rr.com]

[Special Note]
Karl Best joined our meeting today to help with questions regarding CAP....

[CAP]
* Karl clarifies that if we make any edits to teh current document we must vote on it again as a CS.

* Gary expressed concern that there are some schema structure issues that could cause issues with some of the parsers. Question on if we address now, or later? Karl lets us know that if their are "substantive changes" we have to resubmit, but minor edits should not be an issue. So, we can make these after the public review.

* Group came to agreement that we should submit CAP now, rather than performing
any additional edits. We will use the list Walid started (http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/emergency/200310/msg00073.html). Kwasi mentions that should include where the comment came from, so we can even better understand the basis of the comments relative to other events. Rex will send copy of format/template he has used before.

* Rick asks about our requirements for testing given the 2 tests (internal and DC demo) ended up being a bit klunky from a process perspective. Also wanted to understand/make comments on what the OASIS process requires (3 members standing up saying they support it) and how that plays in. Gary and Art share their thoughts on what they think is required. To summarize, this is really 2 issues. One is what OASIS requires - which we now understand as a group and is defined in the OASIS documentation. Second is a lesson's learned from the tests and more importantly the process y which the test was executed. Looking back, we should have defined and completed the test before we a) certified CAP as a Committee Spec, and b) reached out for external implementation demos as soon as we did. We should have taken more time to ensure CAP was where it needed to be before we released it.

[PPW Letter]
* Now that we have made a final determination on CAP, Allen will finish the draft and try to send out tonight.

[Transport Requirements]
* Rick still has not received any comments from the group. Rex asks that we add VoiceXML.

* Art asked for clarification on what this is. Rick talks about how transmitting data applies to how things are sent around, such as CAP. How you can transport things across systems.

* Lots of discussion on trying to explain what this is. In a nutshell, since CAP does not disclose "how" to send messages around, we need to address this somehow. This could be in the form of language added directly to CAP, in a separate spec, in an implementation note, or other - and could either be normative or non-normative.

* Rick is going to take a stab at writing the requirements for the committee to see and better understand.

[Liaison]
* Has sent out request to people at W3C and others.  Next steps are to make as many connections (informal) as possible. Will shoot to have recommendation to TC in 4 weeks.

[MSG SC]
* Discussion around best path for MSG SC going forward. Currently, there are some outstanding Action Items in the SC that need to be completed. We either need to  elect a new Chair, or close the SC and absorb the Action Items into the TC. If anyone  is interested in Chairing or nominating a Chair for this SC, please speak now. We will have this point of discussion as our #1 topic for the next call.